SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/NHL Signings

Boston Bruins signed Matt Grzelcyk (4 Years / $3,687,500 AAV)

Was this a good signing?
The chart has been hidden

Poll Options


Oct. 18, 2020 at 4:43 a.m.
#26
Banned
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 19,215
Likes: 4,837
I don't think he's a top 4 dman.
I don't know, BOS really likes their under sized defensemen.
Not really a fan of the term or the amount on this deal.
I guess we'll see.
DDoverChucky and CD282 liked this.
Oct. 18, 2020 at 7:59 a.m.
#27
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2016
Posts: 12,565
Likes: 5,450
Quoting: PinkWhitney
3.5x5 was way less than what he'd get...


He could have gotten more. This is a good deal from the Bruins' side. He filed for arbitration and he could probably ask for $4.5M+ on a long-term deal.
Oct. 18, 2020 at 9:22 a.m.
#28
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2016
Posts: 2,851
Likes: 639
Quoting: OldNYIfan
Worth every penny. Wish he was on one of my two crummy local teams.


I Am guessing Bruins we not willing to go to 15m so they settled on 14,750,000
OldNYIfan liked this.
Oct. 18, 2020 at 6:28 p.m.
#29
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2016
Posts: 2,851
Likes: 639
Quoting: pharrow
I don't think he's a top 4 dman.
I don't know, BOS really likes their under sized defensemen.
Not really a fan of the term or the amount on this deal.
I guess we'll see.


He is pretty good. He had one more year than McAvoy, but had a 38pts season at BU and then 23 in 27 games. McAvoy highest point total was 26.

He, because of his size is vastly underrated.
Oct. 19, 2020 at 2:08 a.m.
#30
Banned
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 19,215
Likes: 4,837
Quoting: Propeller09
He is pretty good. He had one more year than McAvoy, but had a 38pts season at BU and then 23 in 27 games. McAvoy highest point total was 26.

He, because of his size is vastly underrated.


players really aren't "under rated" because of their size. I use to throw small players out the way, one handed. Period. Other players do the same thing. It's a reality.
When you are 6'4 you toss an elbow out and it knocks them right in the head and it's like nothing. Just physical. he's so short he ran into my elbow.
And that's how refs see it too.
Which is why you don't see a lot of short guys on the ice in their own end. Which means they are hidden, usually in the Ozone, much like Krug.
So I don't by the underrated. He's a midget hockey player. And as the larger players get faster, they will continue to be squeezed out. Because that's the natural progression of sports. Bigger, faster, stronger.
As I said, BOS likes their undersized defense men. I don't think things like that help them when they lose guys like Chara who can set a tone. But we'll see.
Oct. 19, 2020 at 8:23 a.m.
#31
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2017
Posts: 23,767
Likes: 7,637
Quoting: pharrow
I don't think he's a top 4 dman.
I don't know, BOS really likes their under sized defensemen.
Not really a fan of the term or the amount on this deal.
I guess we'll see.


He played 3rd pairing this year, and because Boston hard matches Chara & McAvoy against the opposition's best, that means he was very, very sheltered - more so than most 3rd pairing defensemen. The only time he played 2nd pairing was in 2018-19 (although again, the 1st pairing was hard matched so this isn't typical 2nd pairing minutes) and his numbers don't show great results:

-1.29 CF% rel
-1.47 FF% rel
-0.94 SF% rel
+3.08 GF% rel
-3.11 xGF% rel
-2.26 HDCF% rel
+12.13 HDGF% rel

Lots of luck at play there. What I'm seeing is a good 3rd pairing defenseman who doesn't fare well if he gets moved up the lineup into a 2nd pairing role. That's not a guy you pay $3M+ for 4 years when he won't step onto the ice until his 27th birthday. IMO.
Oct. 19, 2020 at 10:07 a.m.
#32
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2016
Posts: 2,851
Likes: 639
Quoting: CD282
He played 3rd pairing this year, and because Boston hard matches Chara & McAvoy against the opposition's best, that means he was very, very sheltered - more so than most 3rd pairing defensemen. The only time he played 2nd pairing was in 2018-19 (although again, the 1st pairing was hard matched so this isn't typical 2nd pairing minutes) and his numbers don't show great results:

-1.29 CF% rel
-1.47 FF% rel
-0.94 SF% rel
+3.08 GF% rel
-3.11 xGF% rel
-2.26 HDCF% rel
+12.13 HDGF% rel

Lots of luck at play there. What I'm seeing is a good 3rd pairing defenseman who doesn't fare well if he gets moved up the lineup into a 2nd pairing role. That's not a guy you pay $3M+ for 4 years when he won't step onto the ice until his 27th birthday. IMO.


he has three pro seasons and has gotten better every single one.
Oct. 19, 2020 at 10:15 a.m.
#33
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2016
Posts: 2,851
Likes: 639
Quoting: pharrow
players really aren't "under rated" because of their size. I use to throw small players out the way, one handed. Period. Other players do the same thing. It's a reality.
When you are 6'4 you toss an elbow out and it knocks them right in the head and it's like nothing. Just physical. he's so short he ran into my elbow.
And that's how refs see it too.
Which is why you don't see a lot of short guys on the ice in their own end. Which means they are hidden, usually in the Ozone, much like Krug.
So I don't by the underrated. He's a midget hockey player. And as the larger players get faster, they will continue to be squeezed out. Because that's the natural progression of sports. Bigger, faster, stronger.
As I said, BOS likes their undersized defense men. I don't think things like that help them when they lose guys like Chara who can set a tone. But we'll see.


Funny how you "tossed them around" yet they are in the NHL and you are not.

weird.

Also weird how 5 of the top 10 scorers in the NHL are under 5'11" (panarin, Pasta, Marchand, Kane & Kucherov).

FYI - Hughes and Makar are both under 6 feet and McAvoy is 6 Feet.
Oct. 19, 2020 at 10:58 a.m.
#34
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2017
Posts: 23,767
Likes: 7,637
Quoting: Propeller09
he has three pro seasons and has gotten better every single one.


Define "gotten better", because I'm not seeing it. And he's nearly 27, expecting him to make material improvements isn't logical.
Oct. 19, 2020 at 12:03 p.m.
#35
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2017
Posts: 23,767
Likes: 7,637
Quoting: Propeller09
he has three pro seasons and has gotten better every single one.


Sure, bud.

5v5 P/60
17-18: 0.86
18-19: 0.45
19-20: 0.66

5v5 CF%
17-18: 55.62
18-19: 52.14
19-20: 51.94

5v5 SF%
17-18: 57.60
18-19: 53.28
19-20: 52.57

5v5 xGF%
17-18: 56.75
18-19: 50.99
19-20: 55.92

5v5 TOI/GP
17-18: 14:52
18-19: 16:06
19-20: 14:37
pharrow liked this.
Oct. 19, 2020 at 12:28 p.m.
#36
Banned
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 19,215
Likes: 4,837
Quoting: Propeller09
Funny how you "tossed them around" yet they are in the NHL and you are not.

weird.

Also weird how 5 of the top 10 scorers in the NHL are under 5'11" (panarin, Pasta, Marchand, Kane & Kucherov).

FYI - Hughes and Makar are both under 6 feet and McAvoy is 6 Feet.


6 foot is an average size of players so being 5'11 isn't really that bad. It's not being 5'9.....if that.
You can talk all day. One quick view on the ice tells all. We all know what happens in the corners, dirty areas aka front of the net etc... and being 5'9 does not help. Which is why the vast majority of defensemen are not 5'9.
https://hockey-graphs.com/2015/03/05/nhl-forwards-vs-defensemen-height-weight-1917-18-to-2014-15/

this should give you a good idea.

It is what it is. Teams know that it's not figure skating. It's a physical game. And teams prefer guys 6 foot plus.
Oct. 19, 2020 at 12:45 p.m.
#37
Banned
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 19,215
Likes: 4,837
Quoting: CD282
Sure, bud.

5v5 P/60
17-18: 0.86
18-19: 0.45
19-20: 0.66

5v5 CF%
17-18: 55.62
18-19: 52.14
19-20: 51.94

5v5 SF%
17-18: 57.60
18-19: 53.28
19-20: 52.57

5v5 xGF%
17-18: 56.75
18-19: 50.99
19-20: 55.92

5v5 TOI/GP
17-18: 14:52
18-19: 16:06
19-20: 14:37


he has had really good goal tending behind him too. Not gonna lie. Like 94% all situations.
But I do think with Krug gone, they shelter him more. Krug's Ozone starts were unreal. Matt's were like 55-45. Not horribly swayed. But I think we will see that change.
But in the end I'm just not swayed this guy is worth that term or cap hit.
Oct. 19, 2020 at 2:55 p.m.
#38
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2016
Posts: 2,851
Likes: 639
Quoting: CD282
Define "gotten better", because I'm not seeing it. And he's nearly 27, expecting him to make material improvements isn't logical.


Quoting: pharrow
he has had really good goal tending behind him too. Not gonna lie. Like 94% all situations.
But I do think with Krug gone, they shelter him more. Krug's Ozone starts were unreal. Matt's were like 55-45. Not horribly swayed. But I think we will see that change.
But in the end I'm just not swayed this guy is worth that term or cap hit.




Watching him. He is better. He is stronger, his decision making is faster, he is reading the plays better. I don't think expecting him to get better, or at least produce at a higher offensive clip is that illogical.
He used to get no ice time with 63, 37, 88 and now he will get a bunch.

Rask had his statistical worst year in 18-19.

I also think one of his biggest strengths is his offense and because Krug was in front of him, he was always getting 2nd PP time. I don't think it's unrealistic that he puts up 35 ish points this season.
7g 28A. That is worth 3.68m.

Also - for the most part the numbers you sent don't really prove anything. Like, literally nothing. All of those numbers are good and consistent with a 2nd pairing Dman. Especially one at 3.68m

Grzelcyk is 53/47 not 55-45 Zone start. Kind of a big difference. He is virtually 50/50 - While Krug is 60/40. So, Not so trusted in the Dzone as you said. I also think that will change - which means they are going to protect him more so than he has ever been. Theoretically he shouldn't be getting too many tough defensive minutes as you have to assume (carlo, Lauzon, McAcoy and Miller will eat most of those up.

Basically what Krug has been doing... and you dont' think 3.68m is worth that? After writing this he may put of 50pts... He has better hands and a better shot than Krug. He is also a better skater. Krug is one of the best passing defensemen I have ever seen, his vision is unreal.

I think paying him 2.5m for 2 years to be a 3rd pairing guy who doesn't really get to do what he is best at is a waste.

It probably doesn't matter because he will be taken by Seattle.
Oct. 19, 2020 at 3:12 p.m.
#39
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2017
Posts: 23,767
Likes: 7,637
Quoting: Propeller09
Watching him. He is better. He is stronger, his decision making is faster, he is reading the plays better. I don't think expecting him to get better, or at least produce at a higher offensive clip is that illogical.
He used to get no ice time with 63, 37, 88 and now he will get a bunch.

The year he got the most time with these three is 2018-19 which also happens to be his worst year. Why? Because those guys are hard matched against the opposition's best and he can't handle the heat. Why do you think Cassidy moved him back into a 3rd pairing role in 2019-20?
Oct. 19, 2020 at 6:47 p.m.
#40
Banned
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2018
Posts: 19,215
Likes: 4,837
Quoting: Propeller09
Watching him. He is better. He is stronger, his decision making is faster, he is reading the plays better. I don't think expecting him to get better, or at least produce at a higher offensive clip is that illogical.
He used to get no ice time with 63, 37, 88 and now he will get a bunch.

Rask had his statistical worst year in 18-19.

I also think one of his biggest strengths is his offense and because Krug was in front of him, he was always getting 2nd PP time. I don't think it's unrealistic that he puts up 35 ish points this season.
7g 28A. That is worth 3.68m.

Also - for the most part the numbers you sent don't really prove anything. Like, literally nothing. All of those numbers are good and consistent with a 2nd pairing Dman. Especially one at 3.68m

Grzelcyk is 53/47 not 55-45 Zone start. Kind of a big difference. He is virtually 50/50 - While Krug is 60/40. So, Not so trusted in the Dzone as you said. I also think that will change - which means they are going to protect him more so than he has ever been. Theoretically he shouldn't be getting too many tough defensive minutes as you have to assume (carlo, Lauzon, McAcoy and Miller will eat most of those up.

Basically what Krug has been doing... and you dont' think 3.68m is worth that? After writing this he may put of 50pts... He has better hands and a better shot than Krug. He is also a better skater. Krug is one of the best passing defensemen I have ever seen, his vision is unreal.

I think paying him 2.5m for 2 years to be a 3rd pairing guy who doesn't really get to do what he is best at is a waste.

It probably doesn't matter because he will be taken by Seattle.


dude you just making up stats as you go.
in 5v5 play Krug was 69% Ozone starts. IN all situations 73.3%....
I don't know why you even trying to make this mess up, like it isn't easily available. All those number i gave are correct. I looked them up.

Ain't even got time for that.
Oct. 19, 2020 at 7:28 p.m.
#41
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2016
Posts: 2,851
Likes: 639
Quoting: pharrow
dude you just making up stats as you go.
in 5v5 play Krug was 69% Ozone starts. IN all situations 73.3%....
I don't know why you even trying to make this mess up, like it isn't easily available. All those number i gave are correct. I looked them up.

Ain't even got time for that.


Dude, what are you talking about. I know they are easily accessible. YOU should look

Grzelcyk Career: 53% OZ 47% Dzone
Krug Career: 62.6 OZ 37.4% DZone.
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Loading animation
Submit Poll Edit